Okay, after RTFA the author actually comes off as honestly consistent:

If we are going to protect unborn human lives, then we are going to protect them regardless of the circumstances of their conception. An ethic that makes exceptions because we find no culpability in the mother is uncomfortably close to the feminist caricature of pregnancy being used to punish women for their sexuality. If we have a human life at issue, then we do not permit it to be put to death for the crimes of others. We cannot ignore the ghastliness of a woman's having to carry to term a child conceived in such conditions, but we cannot in good faith put that unborn child to death - not if we believe that an unborn child is what it is

This is a true pro-lifer, even though I completely disagree with him, I have more respect for than people who are pro-life but are okay with exceptions in case of rape.

Really... how does their head not explode with the cognitive dissonance? The right are inconsistent with every "philosophy" they have except for the one that says to fellate their corporate buddies at all costs.

Almost Everybody Poops:This is a true pro-lifer, even though I completely disagree with him, I have more respect for than people who are pro-life but are okay with exceptions in case of rape.

Internal consistency is typically a good thing, but making a rape victim go through nine months of daily reminders, all the attendant health problems, expenses, inconveniences, and risks of pregnancy, followed by the arduous experience of giving birth, even if it was absolutely guaranteed that the baby would be whisked off and adopted... that's just the most odious, disgusting, assholish thing you can do to the poor girl. And of course you know they won't pay for her medical expenses. Rape's bad enough when it lasts for nine minutes. Legally mandating that it last for nine months is barbaric.

So the internally-inconsistent crew are more humane, even though they're also assholes.

Conservatives (the rich) have always been in favor of protecting (conserving) their property. And who most might want to take their property? People without any (poor people).

The modern notion of a police force that protects everybody rich and poor alike from criminals is a fairly recent invention. Before this the rich had to hire armed guards, and even today a disproportionate amount of policing is aimed at protecting the rich from the poor while giving a pass to theft and violence on the poor.

So yes, conservatives have always been against violence that threatens them but have been in favor of violence against poor people to keep them in their place.

Almost Everybody Poops:This is a true pro-lifer, even though I completely disagree with him, I have more respect for than people who are pro-life but are okay with exceptions in case of rape.

Agreed that he attempted to be consistently on point. Why isn't he asking for an outright ban on all abortions? Let's take this to the full, logical conclusion, as well. No death penalty, no wars, no pulling the plug, no cops shooting back. He can go there, too - he opened up that can of worms.

All well and good to try and frame one argument - but it's laughably ironic that this is in reference to the current Texas State Legislature - Texas, who is shoulder deep in Death Penalty corpses.

Humans are feral animals unless and until they are taught to be otherwise.

It's impossible to pinpoint when a particular child gains self-awareness and becomes more than a pack animal. We do know that this requires teaching and passed-down knowledge from older humans who were also taught. Lacking that, the person will become far more animal that what we consider 'human'.

This point is certainly after birth. Before birth, it is a human only in a technical/physical sense. There is no cognizant creature silently screaming in the womb. There is an animal.

If you don't believe fetuses are people, all of the anti-abortion arguments become circular.

You have to believe fetuses are people, and you typically believe that either for emotional reasons ("if they see the sonogram you'll KNOW") or religious issues, and there is no clear Biblical case to be made for abortion being murder that doesn't come with myriad scriptural counter-examples.

It's primarily a political wedge issue that's been created by the US religious right to create a very binary and unavoidable issue ("Murder? Yes/No?") in order to drive votes. Otherwise it doesn't make any sense within their typical "traditionalist" doctrine -- fetuses have never been considered people. That's why we have birth certificates, not conception certificates.